User talk:AmazingRacist

This user is opposed to the Wiki-Police State.

This user is annoyed by admins ignoring process.

This user has been permanently banned by Jkelly despite never once having vandalised an article, breached 3RR, been listed on RfC, used a single sock puppet, or received a warning of any sort for any breach of any Wikipedia Policy

WP:RFC/NAME,where I was listed, states "before listing the user here, please first contact the user on his or her talk page and give them an opportunity to change usernames voluntarily". No-one even contacted me to let me know that my name was listed on this page, and I only found out about its existence a few minutes ago. I was certainly never asked to consider altering my username by anyone, at any time. Yet another example of Admins ignoring policy and procedure.

Welcome!

Hello, AmazingRacist, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!

Hello AmazingRacist, Dlohcierekim has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

:) Dlohcierekim 01:24, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Screename

No offense, but your screename is a bit misleading. I know you meant it to say that you're a fan of The Amazing Race (right?), but it sounds more like you're a staunch racist. Unless that's what you mean... just thought I'd bring that to your attention. -- SmthManly / ^ManlyTalk / ^{ManlyContribs} 02:03, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite dude, I'm merely a staunch defender of the principal of keeping information in Wikipedia, and not deleting it because you find it offensive, as happened to the article The Amazing Racist a few weeks ago. It's really just a way of promoting the idea of accepting the inclusion of articles, and not deleting them because you happen to find them offensive. Hope that helps a little bit. :)

Re: Missing Protestor article

The version I deleted was just random vandalism from our Kim Jong Il vandalbot du jour. If you're looking for the earlier content, that was deleted by Will Beback; he's probably the person to ask about that. Hope that helps! Kirill Lokshin 16:49, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK Thanks dude. --AmazingRacist 16:49, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Username block

Your username has been blocked indefinitely because it is either inappropriate or too similar to an existing username (see our blocking policy for more information). You are encouraged to create a new account and contribute to Wikipedia under a more appropriate username, and in a constructive manner. See Wikipedia:Username for guidance on selecting an appropriate username. You may also edit Wikipedia without creating an account. You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia under an inappropriate username. If you would like to discuss the block, you may edit your talk page or email the administrator who blocked you.

Due to Wikipedia's mechanism for enforcing name changes, your IP address may be temporarily blocked. Unless you have also been engaging in vandalism or impersonation of another user, we will remove that block as soon as possible—if this doesn't happen within an hour or so, please email an administrator and explain the situation (see the list of administrators).

If you want to keep the contributions from your old account for your new one, please add the following to your user talk page: {{Username change request|(new username)}} (or {{ucr|(new username)}} for short). This is possible because even when you are blocked, you can still edit your own talk page. Note that this can only be done before you create the new one. If you wish to change to a new username, please visit Wikipedia:Changing username for information. In many cases (especially if your account has few or no edits), it is a lot easier to simply create a new account.

Note -- my block summary was misleading. Editor hasn't engaged in vandalism. I was confused by their request to undelete a vandalised article. Jkelly

So why have I been blocked? --AmazingRacist 17:49, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your username, as detailed above. Decide whether you want to attach this account's contribs to a new username or not, and then follow the instructions above. Jkelly 17:51, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can I ask whether you have banned it because you find it inappropriate or because it is too similar to an existing username? Oh yeah, and what does 'prod'ed' mean? --AmazingRacist 18:00, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Its inappropriate. You've apparantly named yourself after some pop-culture reference. You cannot expect other editors to understand that reference. The problem here is not that I think that you believe that racism is praiseworthy, but that your username has even the slightest change of being understood in a way that makes other contributors feel unwelcome here. Jkelly 18:02, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But what would make them think I would be racist against them? As far as I am aware, there is nothing in Wikipedia policy to stop racists from editing anyway, as long as their edits are in keeping with the normal editing policy. Seems to me that you are pandering to people who don't WP:AGF.— Preceding unsigned comment added by AmazingRacist (talk • contribs)

I'm not clear whether or not you're joking. I am pandering to editors who are uncomfortable with what might be taken for promoting racism on Wikipedia through a username. You're clear that this is a project to create a free, reusable encyclopedia, right? Potentially offensive usernames are a distraction from that. This isn't a webforum where having a provocative username might be expected, or even amusing. Jkelly 18:25, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm not joking, I'm merely expressing my viewpoint. How exactly can it be taken for promoting racism? Nowhere on Wikipedia have I ever made any reference to either my own ethnicity, nor the ethnicity of any other editor or article subject. Who exctly would I be racist against? As I have said, there is nothing in Wikipedia policy to allow for the prevention of editing by editors based upon their own political (perceived or otherwise) beliefs. If I were to believe in, for example, the segregation of people based upon ethnicity, then yes, some people may well find that offensive, but I would expect to be able to freely express my political viewpoints in my editing, and not to be censored other than by community consensus, and I would defend the right of anyone to express those viewpoints and belief, no matter how unpalatable I found them personally. To support this policy is to support the repression and censorship of editors, based upon their perceieved political views.

On an aside, I really do want to know what 'prod'ed' means. I've never heard of that before.

On another aside, the blocking thingy says that unless I've been blocked for vandalism, I should be unblocked in about an hour or so. That was, like, an hour and a half ago dude. I hereby request that I am unblocked in order that I can change my username to "AriShaffirTheAmazingRacist". How does that sound? --AmazingRacist 18:48, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

{{prod}} is a deletion mechanism. You've done a good job convincing me that you're not here as an ecyclopedia enthusiast, so I've lost interest in discussing the username issue with you furter. Jkelly 19:04, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From Wikipedia:Username: Wikipedia does not allow potentially inflammatory or offensive user names. Inflammatory usernames are needlessly discouraging to other contributors, and disrupt and distract from our task of creating an encyclopedia.... The primary purpose of user names is to identify and distinguish contributors. This facilitates communication and record-keeping. The user name is not a forum to be offensive or make a statement. No one has a right to any particular user name. While colorful, interesting, or expressive names may add to the pleasure of Wikipedia, they are not essential. This might include legitimate names and long-established internet pseudonyms that can be misconstrued. I am sympathetic, but the policy is pretty clear here. Unlike Jkelly, it seems to me that you are interested in contributing to the encyclopedia, but I would suggest that you drop the username issue and abide by WP policies. Seriously, don't be put off at Wikipedia in general for this, just understand that there are basic policies in effect that are intended to help the community function as such. Dick Clark 19:38, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your explanation of the decision by making reference to Wikipedia policy Dick Clark, it's a most refreshing change. Unfortunately, my IP address has now been permanently banned by Jkelly, who refuses to discuss the matter, so I shall unfortunately not be able to make any further contributions to Wikipedia. Thanks for your concern anyhow. --AmazingRacist 20:01, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

For the record, it took about three seconds to find this example of AmazingRacist's vandalism: "A number of misconceptions have arisen surrounding HIV/AIDS. Three of the most common are that AIDS can spread through casual contact, that sexual intercourse with a virgin will cure AIDS, and that HIV can only infect gay men and drug users. It should however be noted that the majority of people with AIDS are either IV drug users or gay men." (text in bold added by AmazingRacist, from an edit to the article AIDS). Doesn't this look quaint now: "This user has been permanently banned by Jkelly despite never once having vandalised an article,..." Pinkville 01:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I take it you have also seen the talk page where, when asked, I provide the source for this statement? [4] In the UK as of March 2006, 58% of AIDS sufferers have contracted it from sex between gay males. --AmazingRacist 16:42, 19 May 2006 (UTC) . Why are you labelling contributions which you don't agree with as vandalism? Dont you konow that that is a form of personal atack? --AmazingRacist 01:12, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And you will also have seen the statement from the admin who blocked me "Note -- my block summary was misleading. Editor hasn't engaged in vandalism. I was confused by their request to undelete a vandalised article. Jkelly", in the previous section too? --AmazingRacist 01:34, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The paragraph in question does not refer specifically to the UK. Your addition contorts a statement about AIDS worldwide. Vandalism. I'm not concerned with one administrator's self-deprecation. Pinkville 05:29, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remark

In addition to vandalism, you're blocked indefinitely for using abusive sockpuppets. And here you'd said that you left three weeks ago...Mackensen (talk) 13:23, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Note -- my block summary was misleading. Editor hasn't engaged in vandalism.

Hmm, but User:Jkelly was incorrect in saying so. User:Jkelly's "admission" isn't borne out by reality, as is amply demonstrated in your user contributions. Pinkville 00:17, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:Jppic.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Jppic.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 04:19, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]